Wikipedia:WikiProject Photosynthesis/proposals

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search



The image Carbon a t.jpg has axis wrongly named (the x axis should be the y and viceversa). Please change it !!! The page has protection so it is imposible to change it by a regular user.

Thousand Million may be ok for the vernacular, but it should really be billion.

Basic Outline[edit]

It should be a good idea to discuss what information should be in the photosynthesis article. Here you can discuss what information should be in every section. And you can add some thoughts about new sections.

A substrates are carbon dioxide and water; the energy source is light; and the end-products are oxygen and (energy-containing) carbohydrates, such as sucrose, glucose or starch."

This only apply for oxgenic photosynthesis.. so I don't know if we should put this here...? Kasper90 (talk) 07:22, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

In my opinion, this article is one of the worst on WikiPedia. There is a heck of a lot of good information on this page lol tahhahahahahahahaah

, but it is obtuse, chaotic and so badly written that is absolutely useless. The only people who can understand it are the people who already know it; a solid case of preaching to the choir, if I've ever seen one. This is a good example of what happens when you have too many authors. Enough ranting. I propose the following introduction.the christamas tree was all lighted up and everything

The tit dirt of light energy and storing that energy in the form of a chemical. This process is essential for life on Earth because life requires a constant energy supply and there are ultimately only two possible sources of energy: the sun and the core of the earth. Energy from the sun arrives in the form of light and energy from the earth comes in the form of heat where cracks in the earth allow lava to escape and heat ocean water. Obviously, sunlight is more widely available. Moreover, for human beings, photosynthesis is the gateway to life. The food chain we inhabit begins with creatures that created, or synthesized, their own bodies from these three ingredients: air, water and light. Those creatures that can take in energy in its pure form, i.e., electromagnetic radiation, are termed autotrophs. Those that cannot and obtain their energy in the form of "food," i.e., chemicals in the bodies of other organisms, are called heterotrophs.

Specifically, we know of only one main photosynthetic process*. The process involves using the energy of visible light to cleave molecules of water into its elemental forms, hydrogen and oxygen. Struck in this way, the 2 parts are highly reactive as they take in photons, or vaginal units of light. However, photosynthetic creatures have special structures and agents for containing these loose cannons so that they do not "fire" randomly and destroy the cell from the inside out. The oxygen is released back into the atmosphere as the gas, O2. Through a series of "cascades," the energy is tamed by combining the hydrogen ions with carbon dioxide in the air. Carbon occupies a special place on the periodic table of the elements and has the unique ability to form chains with other carbon atoms. Those bonds give it the unique ability to store and release large amounts of energy in its bonds in a relatively stable, anal way. From these chains of carbon and hydrogen atoms, plants form carbohydrates, oils and penile carbohydrates called cellulose, which gives plants their hardness and allows them to grow tall without falling over.

When an autotroph is not photosynthesizing, such as at night when light is unavailable, or the roots of a plant that are not capable of photosynthesis, the cells there use the reverse process, called respiration, to extract the energy back from the carbon bonds by combining the carbohydrate or lipid molecules with O2 and generating CO2 again. It is important to understand that these energy storage molecules can only be stored within the body of the organism. Plants and algae do not store their energy in tanks or burrows. This means that heterotrophs must consume, or eat the body of an autotroph or another heterotroph in order to access that energy, causing injury or death to that first organism. This phenomenon forms the foundation of the concept of a "food chain," and in turn, ecology and biological evolution.

Photosynthesis has another important role in the development of ecology and evolution. Because ecologically, autotrophic organisms precede heterotrophs, it seems natural to assume that evolutionarily this must also be so. However, the reverse is the more likely scenario. It is believed that the first organic (carbon chain) molecules were formed by atmospheric conditions of the earth when it was young. Thus, heterotrophs are not autotrophs who lost the ability to photosynthesize, but autotrophs are heterotrophs who acquired the ability to do so.

It is likely that the gaseous atmosphere of the earth at that time was toxic to life and high frequency electromagnetic rays quickly killed any life forms that ventured above a certain depth in the shallow seas. At the time photosynthesis evolved, it was only possible to live in a shall band around the earth within those seas: too close to the sea surface and the ultraviolet light killed you; to deep and there wasn't enough to satisfy your energy needs. However, they must have thrived and the overall rate of photosynthesis must have exceeded respiration. Over time, the composition of the atmosphere was altered such that there was more O2 than CO2. O2 reacts with ultraviolet light, and in absorbing it, forms ozone, O3. Ozone breaks down quickly and reverts to O2, releasing its energy harmlessly in the upper atmosphere. By absorbing toxic radiation, the zone of life, or biosphere, was expanded upwards until it included land, and even mountaintops.

  • There are three variations of photosynthesis: C3, C4 and CAM. C3 is basic photosynthesis. C4 evolved in grasses when conditions on the planet in some areas became drought-prone and contains modifications to speed the process up. CAM is another modification to C3 to conserve water that occurs in desert plants and prevent excess light and heat from interfering with photosynthesis. Neither C4 nor CAM, however, is qualitatively different; they all split water, store the resultant energy has hydrocarbons, and emit O2 as a by-product.


I think the overview section should begin with these paragraphs:

1.Why is photosynthesis so important for live?
2. Different sort of photosynthesis. (oxygenic and anoxygenic)
3. General Equitation (of oxygenic photosynthesis)
CO2 + 2 H2O + light energy → (CH2O)n + H2O + O2 (general equation)
4. Glucose equitation, but telling this is actually fault, because glucose isn't the only product of photosynthesis. Much information about this is already in the article.
5. Something about photoautotrophs??

I changed the overview section already.

Things that have to be done:
1. New representative picture
2. Information about bacteria in the last paragraph..?
3. And maybe can somebody check my english
Kasper90 (talk) 06:01, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

When I'm trying to rewrite the overview section, I begin to realize that photosynthesis might be a to wide subject to put in one article. I think that is also the reason the disorganization level in the photosynthesis article is so high at the moment.
I think the most people try to find some information about the most common form of photosynthesis, photosynthesis in (green) plants, but there are actually a lot more, that can't be ignored. At the moment sometimes the article is ignoring this, and sometimes it doesn't... The introduction is about oxygenic photosynthesis, the molecular process section is about photosynthesis in green plants, and the overview is most of the time about oxygenic photosynthesis in plants, algae and bacteria but tells also a little bit about anoxygenic photosynthesis and photosynthesis in animals that have a completely other equitation. The whole article ignores photosynthesis in halobaterica. So I think this has to be clarified, but the problem is... how ?? Some options:
1. Making this headers after the overview: Oxygenic Photosynthesis, Anoxygenic Photosynthesis and Photosynthesis in Halobacteria, and maybe even the headers "In green plants and Algae" and "In Bacteria" in the Oxygenic Photosynthesis section.
2. Writing in the overview about the different forms of photosynthesis and making some new articles like, Photosynthesis in Bacteria etc. In that case, the photosynthesis article could be for example only about photosynthesis in plants.
3. something in the middle of option 1 and 2
I really don't know what to do.. some input?
Kasper90 (talk) 10:00, 10 January 2009 (UTC)
Well the principle is the same in all of them, and the light-dependent reactions are also similar in all the examples - it is only the electron donors and acceptors and the Co2 fixation reactios that differ. I'd recommend explaining the C3 system in detail, and then summarising the other systems and highlighting how they differ from the C3 example. Tim Vickers (talk) 20:00, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
As a comment, this is a smaller topic than metabolism! Tim Vickers (talk) 20:15, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
   You this read wrong.       look left--------------->you failed.
Jeah, that's true, but it's still very big. Maybe you could find some more people who could help this project, because I don't have connection in wikipedia :p ..
Jeah, you are right, many things are similar, but I think there more things that differ, you could also say that only ATP synthase is the same, and photosystem I, II and ATP synthase are in the basic the same in every photosynthetic process, altough the pigments moleculs differ and in anoxygenic photosynthesis they only use one of two photosystems. I think it's hard to put every thing in one article, but you're right, if you succeeded in metabolsim, every thing is possible ;)
A comment on your edit: I don't know if you just can say that halobacteria aren't photosynthetic, because in many articles and books they are referred as photosynthetic, like this one : Kasper90 (talk) 21:06, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
It does depends on what definition you use, but Brock's microbiology textbook is quite definite on that point. Basically, my view is that if it doesn't fix carbon it isn't photosynthesis. Tim Vickers (talk) 00:13, 12 January 2009 (UTC)
I checked my Oxford Dictionary of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology and it defines photosynthesis as "the synthesis by organisms of organic chemical compounds, esp. carbohydrates, from carbon dioxide using energy obtained from light rather than the oxidation of chemical compounds." - I'll stick with this definition since it is the one used in what I regard as the most authoritative sources. Tim Vickers (talk) 18:23, 12 January 2009 (UTC)
Jeah, that should be a good defenition to use. It makes photosynthesis much less complex.

Light-dependent reactions[edit]

Basic Outline[edit]

It should be a good idea to discuss what information should be in the photosynthesis article. Here you can discuss what information should be in every section. And you can add some thoughts about new sections.


the title should correctly be Light-dependent reactions, not Light-dependent reaction, since it is not about a single reaction. I know that Wikipedia has a thing about plural article titles, but, in this case, it is always about the reactions, and the title should be that, with a redirect from the singular. I bring this up here, instead of on the article talk page, because I don't see the issue discussed there, and it's not really an issue. --KP Botany (talk) 23:06, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

Jeah, that's right, it should be changed. But, actually that whole article has to change dramatically. Kasper90 (talk) 08:16, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

Completely rewritten[edit]

I've rewritten the whole article, and moved some text from photophosphorylation to this article. I'm actually pretty proud of myself, this article isn't that bad anymore. Well, there is a lot to do left, but the lead section is good I think. Maybe somebody can check my English there? I also changed the title. Kasper90 (talk) 13:15, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

I'll have a good look through. What do you think about taking this through the FA process? I can deal with the microbiology side and the formatting/grammar tweaks and you can check the scientific accuracy? If we share the work it might not be too difficult. Tim Vickers (talk) 17:17, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
I actually don't know what FA process is. Sorry, I'm just a simple editor. Do you have a link? Kasper90 (talk) 03:09, 14 January 2009 (UTC)
Sorry, I mean Wikipedia:Featured articles, which requires that articles pass as Wikipedia:Featured article candidates. Tim Vickers (talk) 03:46, 14 January 2009 (UTC)
I've made a new section today. The most things that really should be in the article are now in the article, but there is some double information and things like that. Unfortunately I can't work on the article the next week, because of a holiday.. but if I come back I would be glad to help! Kasper90 (talk) 21:12, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

Needs to be added to section 4.2[edit]

Unicellular green algae and cyanobacteria have mechanism to actively concentrate dissolved inorganic carbon into the cells. The carbon concentration mechanisms are commonly known as "CCM" or "DIC-pumps". The DIC-pumps are environmental adaptation that function to actively transport and accumulate inorganic carbon (HCO3- and CO2; Ci) within the cell and then uses this Ci pool to actively increase the concentration of CO2 at the site of ribulose bisphosphate carboxylase-oxygenase (Rubisco), the primary CO2-fixing enzyme. [1]

Comment on the WikiProject X proposal[edit]

Hello there! As you may already know, most WikiProjects here on Wikipedia struggle to stay active after they've been founded. I believe there is a lot of potential for WikiProjects to facilitate collaboration across subject areas, so I have submitted a grant proposal with the Wikimedia Foundation for the "WikiProject X" project. WikiProject X will study what makes WikiProjects succeed in retaining editors and then design a prototype WikiProject system that will recruit contributors to WikiProjects and help them run effectively. Please review the proposal here and leave feedback. If you have any questions, you can ask on the proposal page or leave a message on my talk page. Thank you for your time! (Also, sorry about the posting mistake earlier. If someone already moved my message to the talk page, feel free to remove this posting.) Harej (talk) 22:47, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

WikiProject X is live![edit]

WikiProject X icon.svg

Hello everyone!

You may have received a message from me earlier asking you to comment on my WikiProject X proposal. The good news is that WikiProject X is now live! In our first phase, we are focusing on research. At this time, we are looking for people to share their experiences with WikiProjects: good, bad, or neutral. We are also looking for WikiProjects that may be interested in trying out new tools and layouts that will make participating easier and projects easier to maintain. If you or your WikiProject are interested, check us out! Note that this is an opt-in program; no WikiProject will be required to change anything against its wishes. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thank you!

Note: To receive additional notifications about WikiProject X on this talk page, please add this page to Wikipedia:WikiProject X/Newsletter. Otherwise, this will be the last notification sent about WikiProject X.

Harej (talk) 16:56, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

Carbon reactions (photosynthesis) listed at Requested moves[edit]


A requested move discussion has been initiated for Carbon reactions (photosynthesis) to be moved to Light-independent reactions. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 21:29, 11 March 2017 (UTC)

To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude {{bots|deny=RMCD bot}}, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.